|
A recent court decision upholding the right to invoke
executive privilege does not bar lawmakers from probing alleged
government wrongdoing, an opposition senator and two Catholic
bishops said Wednesday.
Neither does Tuesday’s Supreme
Court 9-6 ruling in favor of a petition by Romulo Neri to exercise
such privilege, apparently, prohibit Sen. Panfilo Lacson from
presenting another witness to an allegedly corruption-tainted
telecommunications project between the Philippine government and
China’s ZTE Corp. Neri was the Socioeconomic Planning secretary
when the $330-million national broadband deal was transacted in
2007. The deal has since been scrapped by President Gloria Arroyo
over allegations of bribery linking her husband and a political
ally. The two “brokers” denied the charges.
Malacañang expressed optimism
that the decision would put an end to the broadband controversy.
Executive Secretary Eduardo
Ermita said he can only hope because specific Senate committees
could consider putting a closure but may also opt to invite Neri to
testify again.
Ermita called the ruling a
victory because the Palace was able to get to the “right side of
the law” and that the “rule of law” functions well.
He said senators who refuse to
accept the ruling have the right to file a motion for
reconsideration.
The Palace supported calls for
the adoption of common ground rules for the Senate and the executive
branch aimed at fostering harmonious ties between them.
Ermita said they will let Neri
decide whether he will attend the next Senate hearing on the
broadband deal.
Another “new” witness
Lacson hinted he has another new
witness who will testify in the next blue- ribbon committee hearing,
tentatively set for April 2.
“There will always be someone
who wants to talk,” he said. “It’s just that they have much
apprehension.”
During the last hearing, Lacson
was surprised by his surprise witness, Leo San Miguel, when San
Miguel denied any knowledge of alleged advances by ZTE for the
brokers amounting to $41 million. The witness also denied having any
information on alleged project overprice as claimed by previous
witness Dante Madriaga. He had identified San Miguel as the source
of his information.
Lacson called on the Senate to
summon Neri to the next hearing, so he can answer questions on the
broadband deal other than the three that the High Tribunal said were
covered by executive privilege.
“It is just right for the
Senate to call Secretary Neri at the earliest time possible,”
Lacson was quoted by ABS-CBN. “After all, the Supreme Court ruling
did not prohibit us from calling him to our hearing.” Neri now
heads the Commission on Higher Education.
Curiosity, disappointmentA
Makati City Mayor and United
Opposition President Jejomar Binay said public clamor for the truth
behind the broadband controversy “will increase” as a result of
the Neri decision.
Besides, Dagupan Archbishop Oscar
Cruz said, the senators can exercise their “prerogative” to
either “close or suspend” their inquiries into alleged anomalies
in the government.
Cruz, a known critic of the
Arroyo administration, added that the Supreme Court’s decision on
Neri’s petition was acceptable since the “truth” behind the
broadband deal is known already.
Tagbiliran (Bohol) Bishop
Leonardo Medroso, also chairman of the Episcopal Commission on Canon
Law of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, said
they “respect” the 9-6 decision.
“Yes … I read [about] it and
it is okay with us … the decision did not say that Neri could no
longer attend” Senate hearings on the broadband deal, Medroso told
the church-run Radio Veritas.
Unlike the bishops, the High
Tribunal’s decision disappointed opposition lawmakers in the House
of Representatives.
During the weekly Ayes and Nays
News Forum, Antonio Cuenco, Roilo Golez, and Teodoro Casiño said
the decision was an “invasion of legislative supremacy.” They
proposed that House Speaker Prospero Nograles make a “stand” on
the supposed “derogation” of the independence of the three
branches of the government.
Nograles, however, said while he
does not totally agree with the ruling, he respects it.
“Congress has its power to
investigate, but I have to respect the decision of the High
Tribunal, although I may admit that I am not happy [with it]. When
there is a conflict between the executive and the legislative
branches, the judiciary comes in to interpret. That’s how
separation of power works,” he said.
The Speaker said he sees no
problem with the executive privilege being cited by Cabinet members.
“We have no problem with that before [in the House of
Representatives]. We would continue to summon potential witnesses in
our future congressional investigations. But if they refuse to
appear, that’s the time we would have them arrested,” he added.
--Efren L. Danao, Angelo S. Samonte, Sammy Martin And Jayson Cruz
Luna
|
